Campaign to extend rail along Waterside (From Daily Echo)
When news happens, text SDE and your photos or videos to 80360. Or contact us by email and phone.
Campaign to extend rail along Waterside
7:10am Thursday 18th February 2010 in News
Campaign to extend rail along Waterside
A CAMPAIGN to reopen a Hampshire railway line could result in trains travelling as far as Fawley, the Daily Echo can reveal.
The Association of Train Operating Companies (ATOC) has called for passenger services on the old Southampton to Hythe line to resume after a gap of more than 40 years.
A new group called the Waterside Community Rail Partnership (WCRP) has been formed in a bid to keep the £3m project on track.
The group has agreed to explore the possibility of extending the proposed service to Fawley and building a new station.
The track already goes as far south as the parish and is used by trains going to and from the Esso refinery.
WCRP members include Totton and Marchwood county councillor David Harrison, who said: “Initially, our discussions centred around a passenger line linking Southampton and Hythe.
However, I suggested we look at the possibility of a service all the way to Fawley.
“Negotiations will take place with Esso as they would benefit from staff being able to get to work by train.
“It might be possible to create a new station outside the refinery, possibly near the Hardley roundabout. Things are at an early stage, anything is possible.”
A £15,000 feasibility study will look at the business case for reopening the line, including the Fawley section.
Cllr Harrison added: “This is a very exciting development with great potential for thousands of people living in Totton and the Waterside.”
The only cloud on the horizon is the possibility of extra trains causing additional disruption at the level crossing in Junction Road, Totton.
Cllr Harrison added: “We’ll have to proceed with caution and make sure the project doesn’t go ahead in a way that causes more congestion.”
ATOC’s proposals for the line were published last summer and gained the immediate backing of South West Trains.
ATOC also called for the old Brockenhurst to Ringwood railway to be reopened to meet growing demand for rail services in the south.
Comments(23)
Totton Ric
says...
7:43am Thu 18 Feb 10
In the last 20 years there has been less Freight trains, most of the oil is piped out & there’s several pipes coming into Fawley now so far fewer trains running (FACT), surly they could work the timetable to work in with a train already due to go through the gates OR open up the “Goods Yard” & have a single platform in there called it Totton East & there would be no more movements through Totton Gates.The railway has been there since 1927 & alot longer than most drivers,It WOULD even take traffic off Tottons roads if people travel in/travel out from waterside.It would definitely take traffic of the Marchwood bypass, maybe a few “Park & Ride” schemes along the way. I must say though they come up with this idea every 2 years though when the answer is staring them in the face for the railway to be reopened for Passengers .
The Wickham Man
says...
8:10am Thu 18 Feb 10
Fully agree with Totton Ric btw.
Common
says...
8:11am Thu 18 Feb 10
.
It's a pipedream.
Condor Man
says...
8:45am Thu 18 Feb 10
Zeo
says...
8:52am Thu 18 Feb 10
Brock_and_Roll
says...
10:22am Thu 18 Feb 10
Aside from the obvious huge cost, there is the almost unsolvable of the stretch of road that runs through Holmsey. To either re-route the road or the track would require destruction of a swathe of forest land - this is hust not going to happen.
Linesman
says...
10:51am Thu 18 Feb 10
During the off-peak period I doubt that there would be more than two an hour, which would mean the gates closing four times for a few minutes.
For those travelling by road from Fawley to Southampton, that are allergic to level crossings, they are easily avoided. It would be mainly local traffic, near these crossings, that would be affected.
Hopefully, it would reduce road traffic anyway.
The Wickham Man
says...
11:07am Thu 18 Feb 10
Common wrote:You aren't thinking hard enough. Your logic effectively says that anything that holds up any road journey must incur the carbon offset. In which case should cars on overcrowded roads penalise each other? Do you really think it is a good idea to penalise anything and everything that tries to reduce dependency on private car travel? Instead, how about a) the train is there to get people out of their cars so there are fewer cars waiting anyway, so journey trimes away from the barriers are reduced; and b) for those (such as yourself possibly) who will not leave their cars behind in any case, will turn off their engines at barriers, or if the cars are modern enough will turn themselves off anyway.
More trains would equal more road disruption due to all the level crossings. Meaning more cars sat at crossings in their most heavily polluting state, so that would probably negate any claimed environmental savings. It's not just Totton, but the two crossings in Marchwood and the one in Hythe.
.
It's a pipedream.
PS Fully agree with Brock and Roll, and it is a tragedy that the line west of Ringwood to Bournemouth West via Wimborne was ever closed. Do we need it now.
southy
says...
11:19am Thu 18 Feb 10
moulefanggoule
says...
12:16pm Thu 18 Feb 10
Beer Monster
says...
1:28pm Thu 18 Feb 10
Having just started a job in Bournemouth, yesterday I decided to cycle up to Beaulieu Road station and hop on the train there, thus saving me half an hour and a ferry ride in the morning.
Unfortunately this isn't so practical during the applaing weather we've been subjected to recently, so here's hoping!
S Pance
says...
3:11pm Thu 18 Feb 10
In a recent Lib Dem newsletter, Terry Scriven stated that pollution at the junction road level crossing is at "critical level".
I assume Scriven isn't scaremongering in order wo win an elelction so why is this proposal being considered along with the one at Dibden?
Cyber-Fug
says...
5:16pm Thu 18 Feb 10
southy wrote:The concept isn't too bad.......... now, how will it be funded ?
you know if they though about a bit longer you could do it in such way that it would improve it all. go back to an old plan that is build a new bridge to cross the test at dock gate 20 straight over to goatie hill ( single arch suspension bridge ) and link it up with marchwood by-pass. then add on to this old plan another bridge crossing the test at the old iron bridge ( green bridge at bell crossing) linking up at nuttsie industal estate and on to the a36, then pull down the old 1953 bridge and the totton by-pass, move the romsey to southampton to the other side of the river so it can stop at totton station and connect up on the bournemouth to southampton line at this point. you will now have room to build a new road bridge across the rail line at totton and do away with the junction crossing.
forest hump
says...
6:10pm Thu 18 Feb 10
Cyber-Fug
says...
6:18pm Thu 18 Feb 10
forest hump
says...
6:51pm Thu 18 Feb 10
Cyber-Fug wrote:It's a figment of "Southy Engineering.com"
I was determined not to get "pulled in" today by southy....... BUT.... WTF is a "single arch suspension bridge"........
southy
says...
7:11pm Thu 18 Feb 10
Cyber-Fug wrote:yes even a suspension bridge has an arch, if it did't have an arch in very hot or very cold weather the road would just break up and the road supporter beams would just twist or come of there bearings, and there multi suspension bridges in the world to day. where the gap is to wide to just to have one
I was determined not to get "pulled in" today by southy....... BUT.... WTF is a "single arch suspension bridge"........
havemercy
says...
8:09pm Thu 18 Feb 10
Condor Man wrote:I for one would absolutely love to have a regular train to Southampton! It would be brilliant.
I'm sure commuters from the waterside area would prefer a 15 minute train journey into Southampton than 30 minutes on the bus
X Old Bill
says...
11:21pm Thu 18 Feb 10
Cyber-Fug wrote:I think that Southy means single SPAN.
I was determined not to get "pulled in" today by southy....... BUT.... WTF is a "single arch suspension bridge"........
A multi span 'suspension' bridge is called a continuous cable-stayed multi span bridge, or something similar.
And, yes he's right! There are a few around the world, some quite old I believe.
Cyber-Fug
says...
9:27am Fri 19 Feb 10
X Old Bill wrote:I guessed that was what he meant..... i was just seeing if he did !
Cyber-Fug wrote:I think that Southy means single SPAN.
I was determined not to get "pulled in" today by southy....... BUT.... WTF is a "single arch suspension bridge"........
A multi span 'suspension' bridge is called a continuous cable-stayed multi span bridge, or something similar.
And, yes he's right! There are a few around the world, some quite old I believe.
southy
says...
10:01am Sat 20 Feb 10
Cyber-Fug wrote:be honest cyber, you did not know.
X Old Bill wrote:I guessed that was what he meant..... i was just seeing if he did !
Cyber-Fug wrote:I think that Southy means single SPAN.
I was determined not to get "pulled in" today by southy....... BUT.... WTF is a "single arch suspension bridge"........
A multi span 'suspension' bridge is called a continuous cable-stayed multi span bridge, or something similar.
And, yes he's right! There are a few around the world, some quite old I believe.
English defence league Hythe division
says...
4:28pm Mon 22 Feb 10
Cyber-Fug says...
7:40am Thu 18 Feb 10